Fire Power At Army Day 2010

[beckham]

And you call it an achievement?

Squash Heads and Armor Piercers are no longer the norm of the day.

Tandem heads, reactive amour, hologram armor is what we talk today.

As a matter of fact I do.Building an armour without any prior experience and coming up Something that could withstand a direct hit from HESH and FSAPDS at point blank. (Without reactive armour added on)

I don't think any composite armour can withstand a Tandem head.The best protection against them is APS. (correct If I am wrong).

And seriously, those impacts doent seem to be from a hit from a 125 mm?

Those were the results of APFDS at point blank range.

Amazed with the results, there has been debate if the Russians had supplied us with training rounds rather than the actual ammunition.

 

[RPK]

 

[sudhir007]

 

[lockh33d]

Well, I am not sure what made them choose a vertical armour over Sloped armour. But the general wisdom can be,

I mean, for the same vertical area covered, it requires the same mass of armor to provide the same horizontal thickness.

→ A vertical plate would need be thicker, but it doesn't need to be as long,

→ where as a sloped plate may be thinner, but you'll need it in longer length.

So Arjun's armour would be thicker than other tanks but not longer.

Aren't you contradicting yourself here? At first, you said:

"it requires the same mass of armor to provide the same horizontal thickness."

Which means that, I can just use the same slab of armor as a horizontal piece and just slant it at an angle, since they're both equal massed.

Then you carry on to say that the hypotenuse of the slanting armor from top to bottom must be of the same height as the vertical piece of armor-This cannot promise that the two pieces of armor, after this alternation, will be of equal mass.

 

[beckham]

Aren't you contradicting yourself here? At first, you said:

"it requires the same mass of armor to provide the same horizontal thickness."

Which means that, I can just use the same slab of armor as a horizontal piece and just slant it at an angle, since they're both equal massed.

Then you carry on to say that the hypotenuse of the slanting armor from top to bottom must be of the same height as the vertical piece of armor-This cannot promise that the two pieces of armor, after this alternation, will be of equal mass.

I thought you would be wise enough to guess the remaining by yourself !

Again,

Your question was - "why not slant it at 45 deg so it can withstand something >125mm? "

lockh, Arjun's armour would be much thicker than other tanks, but not longer as it isn't slanted (Take a look at the first slab in the pic ).

In other tanks, the armour is thinner but longer as it is slanted.(3nd slab in the pic )

So,slanting the thicker (heavier) armour of Arjun would dramatically increase its weight, something you don't need on an already heavy tank.

Hope you get it......

 

[lockh33d]

I thought you would be wise enough to guess the remaining by yourself !

Again,

Your question was - "why not slant it at 45 deg so it can withstand something >125mm? "

lockh, Arjun's armour would be much thicker than other tanks, but not longer as it isn't slanted (Take a look at the first slab in the pic ).

In other tanks, the armour is thinner but longer as it is slanted.(3nd slab in the pic )

So,slanting the thicker (heavier) armour of Arjun would dramatically increase its weight, something you don't need on an already heavy tank.

Hope you get it......

And I thought you'd be smart enough to realize your mistake. You said to equal the thickness of a vertical armor would require THE SAME MASS, meaning that I can slant that particular vertical mass at an angle, thereby not changing the mass to begin with so in the end, we end up with a lower tank altogether, which would also lower the center of mass of the tank allowing for greater centripetal forces to act on the tank without it flipping.

THAT, is what you told me in words, regardless of what your picture from I don't know where tells us.

 

[beckham]

And I thought you'd be smart enough to realize your mistake. You said to equal the thickness of a vertical armor would require THE SAME MASS, meaning that I can slant that particular vertical mass at an angle, thereby not changing the mass to begin with so in the end, we end up with a lower tank altogether, which would also lower the center of mass of the tank allowing for greater centripetal forces to act on the tank without it flipping.

THAT, is what you told me in words, regardless of what your picture from I don't know where tells us.

Did I tell you so ? Ending up with a lower tank with lower center of mass ?

 

[lockh33d]

Did I tell you so ? Ending up with a lower tank with lower center of mass ?

Here, eat your words:

"I mean, for the same vertical area covered, it requires the same mass of armor to provide the same horizontal thickness."

Vertical area of the block of mass doesn't change, just rotated in a different plane, mass doesn't change, still the same block, so where's the problem? This is what you've told me, which leads on to other developments.

 

[lockh33d]

Ohh.. So you took the single line and imagined the rest, ending up with a totally different result. Take a good look at the post.( keeping your pre-assumptiom apart) It isn't wroth telling you !

Haha? Imagined the rest? Lowering the height of the tank as a whole most definitely lowers the single point which gravity acts through, afterall, it's called the CENTER of mass for a reason, gravity acts through the center! With a lower center of mass, it allows greater force to act on it without it tumbling over, thereby sharper turns-Greater Centripetal force. This is all made possible with the SAME MASS OF ARMOR as the vertical piece, BUT SLANTED TO DECREASE THE VERTICAL HEIGHT, so where did I make up stuff again? This is all analyzed from YOUR interpretation AFTERALL, is it not?

 

[sancho]

The thing is, most tanks today don't have armor which allow others to hit it at a perpendicular angle, whereas this tank does, which I find quite stupid, no offence.

I understand your point, because I thought the same when I saw the first pics of Arjun. Not only for protection reasons, but also for beeing less detectable for radars..., this turret design is not up to date anymore.
I think anyone have to agree simply by comparing it with T90, or latest tanks like the Israeli Merkava 4 for example:

However, the reason why this design was chosen, is that the german company Krauss Maffei had assisted in the design of Arjun. They developed the Leopard 2 tank and you can see the similarity in the design here:

The latest upgraded versions of this tank also has changed the design in the front area of the turret:

This might be done with Arjun in later versions too.

 

[gogbot]

So why not slant it at 45 deg so it can withstand something >125mm? Isn't that better?

Well, I am not sure what made them choose a vertical armour over Sloped armour. But the general wisdom can be,

I mean, for the same vertical area covered, it requires the same mass of armor to provide the same horizontal thickness.

→ A vertical plate would need be thicker, but it doesn't need to be as long,

→ where as a sloped plate may be thinner, but you'll need it in longer length.

So Arjun's armour would be thicker than other tanks but not longer.

Aren't you contradicting yourself here? At first, you said:

"it requires the same mass of armor to provide the same horizontal thickness."

Which means that, I can just use the same slab of armor as a horizontal piece and just slant it at an angle, since they're both equal massed.

Then you carry on to say that the hypotenuse of the slanting armor from top to bottom must be of the same height as the vertical piece of armor-This cannot promise that the two pieces of armor, after this alternation, will be of equal mass.

I thought you would be wise enough to guess the remaining by yourself !

Again,

Your question was - "why not slant it at 45 deg so it can withstand something >125mm? "

lockh, Arjun's armour would be much thicker than other tanks, but not longer as it isn't slanted (Take a look at the first slab in the pic ).

In other tanks, the armour is thinner but longer as it is slanted.(3nd slab in the pic )

So,slanting the thicker (heavier) armour of Arjun would dramatically increase its weight, something you don't need on an already heavy tank.

Hope you get it......

And I thought you'd be smart enough to realize your mistake. You said to equal the thickness of a vertical armor would require THE SAME MASS, meaning that I can slant that particular vertical mass at an angle, thereby not changing the mass to begin with so in the end, we end up with a lower tank altogether, which would also lower the center of mass of the tank allowing for greater centripetal forces to act on the tank without it flipping.

THAT, is what you told me in words, regardless of what your picture from I don't know where tells us.

Did I tell you so ? Ending up with a lower tank with lower center of mass ?

Here, eat your words:

"I mean, for the same vertical area covered, it requires the same mass of armor to provide the same horizontal thickness."

Vertical area of the block of mass doesn't change, just rotated in a different plane, mass doesn't change, still the same block, so where's the problem? This is what you've told me, which leads on to other developments.

Ohh.. So you took the single line and imagined the rest, ending up with a totally different result. Take a good look at the post.( keeping your pre-assumptiom apart) It isn't wroth telling you !

I don't read contradictive posts. On one hand, someone tells me this from his own p.o.v. But after realizing that he has absolutely no idea of what he's on about from reading or analyzing an image, he shifts his entire focus onto his "paper" analysis, leaving his own to rot.

That's because I've already grasped every single world of that line and repeated it numerous times in my past few posts-Whose debunked again? You're done explaining because you're already debunked. The mature one doesn't use belittling language, as used by Bend it like Beckham-That's belittling by the way, ironic ain't it?

I dont know why both of you wanted to debate this.

there could be any number of reasons why the Arjun did not have Noticeably vertically slanted armor.

I always though they needed the extra room, in the turret.
May be the Kachan armor needs the extra thickness to function better

May be since the Tank only had to meet the army's requirements of being able to withstand 125mm shells. They stuck with the design they had.

I shall admit a more low profile and slanted armor would have been better.

But the armor withstood point blank shots from the T-72. So its protection cant really be called into question.

So, Why does the tank not have slanted armor.
you have to ask DRDO, may be IA did not specify low profile as requirement, from what i know the IA just wanted a tank killer. DRDO came up with the Arjun.

Does that make the Tank any less protected then other tanks
The point blank test should attest to its armor.

 

[RPK]

I understand your point, because I thought the same when I saw the first pics of Arjun. Not only for protection reasons, but also for beeing less detectable for radars..., this turret design is not up to date anymore.
I think anyone have to agree simply by comparing it with T90, or latest tanks like the Israeli Merkava 4 for example:


However, the reason why this design was chosen, is that the german company Krauss Maffei had assisted in the design of Arjun. They developed the Leopard 2 tank and you can see the similarity in the design here:



The latest upgraded versions of this tank also has changed the design in the front area of the turret:


This might be done with Arjun in later versions too.

some thing like this

as in my avatar

 

[Xeric]

As a matter of fact I do.Building an armour without any prior experience and coming up Something that could withstand a direct hit from HESH and FSAPDS at point blank. (Without reactive armour added on)

Yes yes, i can understand the pride, but i was not exactly hitting on that. i was more concerned of the fact that armor have moved ahead of those 'achievements' that you mentioned and you need to reach there fast

I don't think any composite armour can withstand a Tandem head.The best protection against them is APS. (correct If I am wrong).

Tandem head is mainly there to counter reactive armor.

However, PG-7VR (which also works on the tandem thing) was specifically designed to defeat composite armor.

Amazed with the results, there has been debate if the Russians had supplied us with training rounds rather than the actual ammunition.

Amazed?

An armor plate that defeated a velocity-projectile? Seriously!

 

[lockh33d]

some thing like this

as in my avatar

That's a rifled barrel pal, that hasn't been changed or updated.

 

[RPK]

That's a rifled barrel pal, that hasn't been changed or updated.

105mm tank gun Cut model


Pic is here

Panzermuseum Munster - Wikimedia Commons